Skip to main content

tv   Book TV  CSPAN  May 11, 2013 8:00am-9:01am EDT

8:00 am
[inaudible conversations] >> you're watching booktv, 48 hours of nonfiction authors and books every weekend on c-span2. here are some of the programs to look out for this weekend. ..
8:01 am
watch these programs and more all weekend long on booktv before a complete schedule visit >> this department may be nearing a stage where the frequency of this crime and the perception that there's tolerance of it could very well undermine our ability to effectively carry out the mission and to recruit and retain the good people we need. that is unacceptable to me and the leaders of this institution and it should be unacceptable to everyone associated with the united states military. we need cultural change where every service members treated with dignity and respect, where all allegations of inappropriate behavior are treated with seriousness, where victims's privacy is protected, whereby
8:02 am
standards are motivated to intervene and where offenders know that they will be held accountable by strong and effective systems of justice. >> this weekend on c-span defense secretary hegel outlines new initiatives to fight sexual assault in the armed services today at 1:40 eastern, sunday morning at 10:30 senior diplomat of libya gregory hicks before the house oversight committee on the attack in benghazi. on c-span2's booktv this weekend google's eric schmidt and jericho and share their vision of a world where everyone is digitally connected sunday morning at 10:45 and on c-span freak former cia chief soviet analyst ray cline on cold war intelligence during the eisenhower administration sunday at 3:00. >> next on booktv victor navasky, publisher of the nation present his thoughts on the power of political cartoons. this is a little under an hour.
8:03 am
>> i had to come all the way from next door to be here. the ideal invitation and i am honored to be at the honors college and this for me is an experiment. you are the subjects of the experiment because as you may have gathered from the introduction, i am everything except i am a word person and i have been brought up in the world of words and one of the lessons to me and problems for me in putting together this book was i discovered shortly that word people don't have the arch and images can on occasion be more powerful than words.
8:04 am
how do you deal with that in words? that is the dilemma you will see and when i show you some of these pictures i had to deal with so let me start by just reading you the beginning from the beginning of and 11 because it tells how i got into this project and sort of forecasts what is to come but before i get there the first quote in the book is one picture is worth 10,000 words, chinese proverb perhaps wrongly it to be did confucius but he didn't say it she should have. the last quote is a caricature is putting the face of a joke on the body of the truth. that was joseph conrad, very brilliant and very profound. in something like 30 years at the nation's first as a magazine's editor, then as the owner and publisher only once did the staff march on my office
8:05 am
with a petition demanding we not publish something and that something was a cartoon, a caricature and the nation is the bastion of word people. at the time i thought the staff's anchor had to do primarily with the fact that they thought the cartoon in question was politically incorrect or not pc, no matter that the character was the late david levine, perhaps the leading practitioner and no matter that his caricature was of powerful work of art indeed. that was the problem. it all started with a phone call from david who i had known as a former contributor to monocle which was mentioned in the introduction which we call the leisurely court of politically satire, a came out twice a year and i found as a student at yale law school in the late 1950s. by now david was known to his followers as one of the great unfashionable realist painters,
8:06 am
he was known to the immediate and the intellectual community as the genius responsible for the artfully witty but wicked cross hatch caricatures that helped define the look of the prestigious new york review of books since its founding in 1963. david called because he a delmack caricature of henry kissinger on assignment for the review which his editor felt was too strong, the magazine said it would publish the caricature later, david was not so sure about that and anyone wanted to publish it right away. the cartoon as he told me showed henry kissinger in bed on top and the world in the form of a naked woman underneath him. had a globe where head should have been and henry kissinger was screwing her, i am quoting david, under an american flag blanket. were we interested? david, i said, i will get in all sorts of trouble but of course i
8:07 am
am interested. why will it get you in trouble? he asked. i said it will get me and all kinds of trouble with our staff, i don't know, but i know it will. the cartoon arrived an hour later. it was as expected and here i described the cartoon rather than describe it to you live will show it to you. so think about that. two hours later, this is one of the most brilliant cartoons. two hours later, a petition landed on my desk signed by 25 people in an office i had thought implied or dirksen senate office building 3. many of the signatures were followed by little comments, sexist, why isn't he doing it to a third-world asked another, i called an office wide meeting and told everyone was important to keep three things in mind, first, although i took the
8:08 am
staff's concerns seriously it would be no vote at the end because you can't or at least shipment decide what sense of aesthetics by majority vote. luckily no one asked why. second, this work had been offered to us on a take-it-or-leave-it basis so anyone was free to say whatever he or she pleased, and the drawing would have no operative affected. and feared, because i have already told levine we intended to use the drying, the magazine, always change its mind but the decision not to use it would have the with of censorship. the most articulate staff objection to the drawing was that the nation was supposed to fight against stereotypes and this cartoon reinforce the stereotype that sex was dirty and something that an active male on top does to a passive woman on bottom.
8:09 am
my favorite moment came when our then columnist christopher hichens, complained to the office and wore a white suit, said that he thought that the cartoon was not an act of sex but an actf rage, kissinger ravaging the world. but if you look at the woman's hand, replied the young woman who had made a point about stereotypes it seems to be gripping the mattress with what could be called the grip of passion. at this point the white suited suave christopher in his british accent leaned over and gripped the young woman by her hand and said trust me, my dear, it is not the grip of passion. david pointed out -- asked david to join us and david pointed out as a caricature it poses the problem when when it is rendering members of a minority race. how do you make a comment on
8:10 am
racism without falling into its track? nevertheless it is the cartoonist's job to play off of stereotypes that a majority of readers and viewers will recognize. david being david also said the wrong things. when asked why the man had to be on top he replied in a room that included people of various sexual preferences i am just showing what normal people do. after he had spent two hours on the griddle having been shown no deference i asked him whether he was sorry he came and he said he had been doing this work for 25 years and never had as serious a discussion and for that he was grateful. he had gotten some new insights into the problematics of cartooning but added if i had to do it again i wouldn't change a line. it is one of the strongest pieces i have ever done. my thought at the time was beyond political objections the staff's emotional reaction which
8:11 am
i've got an over reaction was a delayed protest over my failure to consult as much as i might have with my generation into the cavity to matters of sexual politics. looking back i can see in underestimating the power of the image to provoke i may have internalized the views of many art critics, historians and artists who themselves have over the years dismissed cartoons and caricatures as fundamentally not serious, inconsequential, irrelevant, marginal, harmless, frivolous, benign, childish, immoral and silly but it was not until 2004 when the danish newspaper famously published a dozen cartoons and here i described what happened, of the profit mohammed that i thought the focus on the power of cartoons and cartoons after all from asia to europe, hundreds of
8:12 am
thousands of muslims to the streets to protest, indices were shut down, ambassadors were recalled and burned danish flags worldwide, more than a hundred people were killed, another 500 injured, danish goods were boycotted, the cartoonists were forced to go into hiding with a million-dollar price on their heads. suffice it to say the emotional response of millions of muslims the world over to the danish mohammad in retrospect may be suspect and nation's reaction to the kissinger cartoon has much to do with the medium as it did the message. i could go on but the point, that is how i got involved in this. i started to go back in the past and research what had happened to cartoonist and characters in the past and discovered someone was thrown into prison which was news to me and his publisher was
8:13 am
thrown into prison. i will show you something his publisher who is also a caricature did, it showed king philippe as a pair which was also known as a fat head and was an insulting image that the king had and he was put on trial for this cartoon and his testimony at the trial is worth reading but i can't find it so i am not going to read it to you but i will show you what he did in his cartoon in gargantua, he did get thrown into prison for two years for doing this cartoon of the king in the form and shape of a pair. i am finding the testimony
8:14 am
because it is worth hearing and let me just go back to it. it is not just these guys who got in trouble. more recently, the leading palestinian cartoonist was murdered on the streets of london for his cartoons and they still haven't figured out who did it because of israeli cartoons work arafat who had done some insulting cartoons, was said to commission someone to assassinate him. all the way up with eric is punishment by censorship or prison, and singled out and punished over the years.
8:15 am
they're dealing with humor, and and he said this was the first trial, the first look like louis philippe, and the last one is a pair. where do you draw the line, and you should have to condemn the last as well since this resembles the first and that is the king and can i help it if his majesty's face is like a pair? he's been two years in jail because he created a pair which demonstrates a certain similarity with the king. in this case you would have to convict oral caricatures which depict the head which is narrow at the top and brought at the bottom. in this case i can promise you you will have more than enough
8:16 am
to do, the malice of artists will find a great amount of pleasure in demonstrating this in any variety of broad circumstances and see how you will have raise royal dignity, and reasonable limits you placed on liberty. and because it supports thousands of artists and printers, liberty which is my right which you cannot deprive me of even if i was the one to use it. this is one of many different ways in which cartoonists have attempted to deal with attempts to stop them from doing what they know how to do. one of the questions i asked myself is what is going on here? why do people get so upset about
8:17 am
this. and a long introduction about 75 pages, i examined three series, one which i call the contents theory that people get upset because of the content, what else is going on, and the way the cartoon functions and the brain is the response and has to do with neuroscience which conducted experiments, and they have their own theories, let me show you this, the work of a great british cartoonist named ralph said men, he has a theory of his own which is to meet quite original and important observation, goes back to a problem of using words to
8:18 am
describe pictures, and it is easily identifiable like poetry it resists paraphrased and when they derive their power he says, quote, the only thing of value is you -- what you cannot say, that is where drying is so important. you could do something with a drawing that you couldn't say in words. he also said apropos our experience with david levine, no matter what words you use to describe henry kissinger's policies in the caribbean the drawing came about because of report that kissinger had chaired, you couldn't capture what he captured with that
8:19 am
picture and another example of this that has fallen into the history books is another levine picture, lyndon johnson showing his par in the form of vietnam. those two drawings suggest one of the things about cartoons and caricatures which is they can live on long after their initial exposure and they have a permanent seat in the culture that words sometimes do and sometimes don't and in that respect they are like poetry in that they both resist paraphrases but capturing lot in a short way. how does one deal with this question -- let me find this next -- this question of using
8:20 am
words to answer a cartoon i finally found the answer to that question that i just put to you, but the answer is not in words. here is the answer of how one deals with the paradox of using words to answer a cartoon. this is the steinberg. it says a lot but i can't say what it says because i don't have the words to say it. that is it. if one takes this first theory, the content theory, people get upset because of the content the most famous american cartoonist was thomas nast to stimulated, this is one of the drawings for a lot of them here, they were all pointing, and he treated himself famously, said of this, of nast's, he said i don't care
8:21 am
what they write about me but get rid of the pictures and he understood something that was very true about nast's and the force of these pictures and there's a great irony, it was proper that we did as an australian was brought to justice by spanish customs officials who recognized him and the irony of ironies is cartoons and other cultures, imprisoned and worse for their artistic assault in the powerful and corrupt, it was the targets who went to prison but before they did they tried to buy him off with an art scholarship. he had studied art, kept expressing interest and kept raising the price and they finally got up to something like tens of thousands of dollars to study art and before he told
8:22 am
them thanks but no thanks and a fitting tribute seemed to me. besides the content theory there is the image theory which goes all the way back to the old testament, speaking of the muslims, forbidden in the ten commandments, so here to me, i am going to show you three of four pictures from the masses. i was aware of art young who did this jesus christ wanted poster, tried to put him in prison for doing that, sued the masses and put it out of business, claimed it violated the espionage act. i had seen art beyond's pictures, my father had shown it to me and showed me this one,
8:23 am
look at the stars was the full comment on the original picture. i had come to admire, this is robert miner, i had come to admire the cartoons, but what i didn't understand before we went to the cartoon collections at ohio state university was where they have the full back issues of the old ones when you go through them issue by issue, the pictures overwhelm the words. it is as if the words illustrated the pictures. they have a power that is startling, and i want to read from their manifest0 because it expresses the joy they took in doing what they do. i love their manifesto and here is what they said. a revolutionary, not reform magazine, magazine with a sense
8:24 am
of humor and no respect for the respectable. frank, arrogant, important, searching for true causes, a magazine directed against rigidity and dogma, printing what is too naked for the moneymaking, plus a magazine whose final policy is to do as it pleases and conciliate nobody but the thing is it did it with pictures, did it with art and did it better than anyone else did it at the time. cell i want to go from there to show you, and to give another artist very different from stat man's theory and different from the content pherae and different from the image theory, this is the artist david low, did these amazing portraits of adolf hitler and every time one came
8:25 am
out, hitler would hit the roof and have a fit. and the explanation as to why. in 1928, an article in the british journal of medical psychology in which they observed a portrait painter's task was to record the character, the essence of a man in the heroic sense. the characters had an opposing goal, he did not seek the perfect form but the perfect deformity to penetrate the out reappearance to the inner being and its ugliness. let me find low's comment.
8:26 am
was loath said it is dictators, the reason hitler got so upset by these drawings was dictators don't mind being portrayed as bloody monsters who are putting down everybody and enjoying how powerful they are. what they object to is being portrayed as the asses that they are and here is one example. the famous cartoon, up rendezvous and you can see it. the third perspective on this thing is what i think of as a
8:27 am
neuroscience theory. this one looks at the cartoon as the stimulus and the brain as the response and this one, let me read you, there is not only all whole new field of neuroscience that purports to explain the way art affects the brain, there's an article on sunday in the review section by at neurosciences from columbia, there's a whole new field called narrow esthetics. i am suspicion of it but they conduct experiments, let me read you about one of them and this experiment led to something they call the peak shift effect. and it is a concept that involve from experiments with of all things chicks. because the chicks are entirely
8:28 am
dependent on their mother's for food, when they see a yellow bird with a red dodge at the end like their mother's they beg for food by pecking at the dodgers. indicate narrow scientists to discover when the chicks are exposed to a fake beak, they would not stick with a red dot at the end, they peck rigorously at that too. and more red dots the more avidly they peck. the picking peaked as a result of shifting the stimulus, more red dots, hence the peak shift effect. the connection between this phenomenon and cartoons and characters is said to lie in the area of the brain involved in facial recognition. this is no surprise since caricatures emphasize the same features we use to distinguish one face from another. the narrow scientists think the
8:29 am
caricature works on the same principle as the peak shift effect. consider the way in which a skilled cartoonist introduces a caricature of a famous face, say richard nixon's. what he does unconsciously is take the average, subtract the average from nixon's face to get the difference between nixon's face and all the others and amplify the difference to introduce a caricature. of final results is a drawing that is even more nixon like than the original. if the checks had an art gallery they would hang a long stick with red dots and worshiping and pay millions of dollars for it. the citation of nixon to me is interesting because the great cartoonist doug marla once said nixon looked mike his policies.
8:30 am
he was to cartoonist's what marilyn monroe was to 6. his nose told you he was going to invade cambodia. and let we know where we are in time, running a little -- quote you one thing and want to tell you one thing. the one who already quoted, both a critic and psychologist, psychiatrist, the caricature is in the business of mythologizing of the world, translation, by reading the mythical with their real the caricature creates the fusion, that fusion, that amalgam that seemed so convincing to be emotional mind. you can call a cabinet minister a parasite but to make the
8:31 am
charge visually as in the famous french of prime minister william pitt which i have in the book but not up here, something else again. let me -- so we have looked at some other people's series. i will show you some other cartoons that are in the book but i will tell you the stories that go with them. in every case a cartoonist got into a lot of trouble. this with another nation cartoonist that got in trouble with the gay community, he did this when a book came out saying abraham lincoln might be gay. he was roundly attacked for suggesting that, to be a gay man meant there was a woman inside of your body and he wrote a very smart response which i could read you if your interested in. a great writer said -- and herb locke who gave nixon his 5:00 shadow and here he comes now,
8:32 am
nixon coming out of the sewer and again, that is one of these permanent images that as much as anything helps to bring nixon down, watergate was part of it but this contributed to. and this cartoon has to do with the danish mohammad. the danish mohammad at the time they cause the fuehrer, the new york times wrote an article saying we are not going to publish the caricature is because they were easily describe a bowl and you describe the monday internet and as a result of that there was no need to publish them because you could describe them and you could look, if you need to. at the time i thought that was all wrong because you have to experience them in order to understand them and to describe them is the opposite of what a work of art or a cartoon does
8:33 am
but when it came time, are we going to include them in the book or not? the publisher always worried that bookstores, people would come into bookstores and the book sellers were at risk that they might be bombed, they might be attacked or amazon wouldn't carry the book. so we had long discussions about this and in the art of -- in "the art of controversy" i print the reason i give you an assignment, the assignment is which of the following is true? these characters are not included because you been find the money internet anywhere, because the publisher was worried amazon wouldn't carry
8:34 am
block's among those cartoonists and the correct answer, he was something else that death was all of the above and f was the correct answer but i do include the cartoon, what this is, you see the artist's hand on this pencil and he is writing i must not depicted mohammad. i must not drop mohammad, i must not -- he writes this a hundred times and by the end has drawn mohammad and it seems to me it says it all better than one could say it by showing it. those are some of the issues in the course of compiling this book and i want to leave you with the question i still have for myself and then take your questions if i can answer them, namely i am a person who is a card-carrying member of the american civil liberties union.
8:35 am
i am a follow-up of the power of against censorship, i believe words. they really are. if they aren't they are received as if they were. what do you do about that? does that change the case for free speech in any way, shape or form, put it in a different perspective than those are the issues i raised in "the art of controversy" so thank you for hearing me out. [applause] >> have i answered all questions or can i draw you the answer to any questions? >> hold on.
8:36 am
>> the abe lincoln cartoon. >> want me to go back to that? what can i -- you want to know the story that went with it? okay. just a second. the basic fact is bob grossman who is a world-class cartoonists read the article that said this new book had come out and this image implanted itself in his head. let me read you what he wrote about it. and what he said to the people who were upset by him. we heard from lots of people
8:37 am
including doug ireland who was a regular contributor to the nation who is the gay activist and a friend who says you guys just don't get it. that cartoon is like something out of a time warp, long ago disprove the notion that a man really wants to be a woman and is truly from another era and by -- the only response by the magazine the editors simply magnify their in sensitive error to put it simply, they just don't get it. and i think i get it but whatever one thinks about grossman's made lincoln seems to me inarguable that affect the character was an image rather than words how could it have been otherwise, raise the temperature of the offended to scalding and grossof man wrote
8:38 am
-- now -- when i read the review in the new york times, the world of abraham lincoln, the words babe lincoln ran through my mind rendering me helpless. in the impoverished mental landscape of a cartoonist this is what passes for true inspiration. i knew gave food to were not necessarily a effeminate cross dressers or bearded ladies but i couldn't let that prevents me from having my laugh. better a cheap and in vile joke and no joke at all or so i thought. now i hereby apologize to anyone i offended. somebody asked me about the picture, it was a contemporary symbol of lincoln although i read he may not have split any rails. somehow i thought it would make this picture more ag. these are tough calls.
8:39 am
there we are. >> i am also wondering about a more recent phenomenon as far as the idea that the term for the 7% became synonymous with mitt romney not caring about the 4 and stuff like that and all over facebook and other parts of the blogowsphere during the election, so wondering if these little quips have this sort of power along with image back rows, images with text like a picture of a bunch of people in a corporate board room laughing, then supply side economics actually works or something like that. >> it is a good point and you are right that there are things that become symbolic of much
8:40 am
larger complex social issues but they sometimes touched a nerve because they summarize it so concisely, the visualization of that and the ability conceptualize it in images is a talent that infuriates people partly because of they don't agree with you strikes them as unfair and the fact that it dips into things that are racial or sexual, dealing with the issues of personal identity compounds the problem. nevertheless that gives the explosive power to this medium but thanks for that observation. >> i wonder with your experience, where you find the best cartoons today, what source would you go for the best
8:41 am
cartoons for the most original? >> go to my grandchildren, i go to the new yorker which is one of the last places, the new yorker, in the book, the problematic cover they ran during the obama's first campaign which showed michele and obama doing the fifth bomb addressed in terrorist guard and the cartoonist who is a talented cartoonist thought he was satirizing the right wing's view of the obamas as a terrorist and a lot of readers to get to be a statement that the obamas are terrorists and the editor had to apologize for it. tina brown on a couple of occasions ran explanations of cartoons, some of which i have in here. toomey, whenever you feel you have to run an explanation of a cartoon, it is of problem.
8:42 am
they should make their statement and let readers, viewers figure out what they mean. if you know or suspect that they might be misunderstood, that is one of the ironic facts that it didn't help tina brown or the new yorker or save it from the criticism. it drew attention to it, the fact that they put a paragraph in there saying it. that is one of the places i go. it used to be playboy did a lot of cartoons some of which were pretty funny and most were sexist, but they don't do it anymore and with the gift they used to do it. there was a magazine called the realists that would run great cartoons, but there today are
8:43 am
great cartoonists, tom tomorrow and a bunch of other young her up and coming cartoonists and characters and there was a review in the book in the wall street journal on sunday the first two thirds of which couldn't have been happier if you were the author of this book the less third set of the authors to be faulted it is not because of what he put in but what he left out and what he left out were all these great -- a number of these who operate, some of them on paper, some of them on line, some of them and in new media that move, so the art is not going away. that can be your next. >> follow-up. >> you are allowed. >> the controversy.
8:44 am
>> jon tester 11. >> a lot of what you have shown isn't shown because of the increased awareness for better or worse of political correctness. what is the future of cartooning. it seems to me cartoonists are very wary of striking that dangerous note. >> cartoonists, many conventional, old-fashioned cartoonists who died definition were not conventional people are worried that it is the disappearing profession, fewer and fewer people make their living from old-fashioned pen and ink cartoons. i agree with you, not for better or worse, for worse, political correctness, can't be worried about that and make your statement to the world whether you are a cartoonist for a politician or anything else, but
8:45 am
language counts. you have got to take the consequences if you use language which is offensive to other people and there are some real problems there. bob grossman who did the baby lincoln cartoon was an old monocle cartoonists, starting out, his first job out of college was as an assistant to the new yorker cartoon editor and he would pick some of the cartoons and he told me he would never draw an african-american or black person because he didn't want to draw fat lips and stereotypes of black people and contributing to this problem. but he then came up with an idea for a comic strip about a black shoeshine boy who said magic word and turned into a non-violent superman and the magic word kept changing from booker t. washington to whatever you want to know. it is a very funny comic strip
8:46 am
and he managed to draw black folks in a way that wasn't stereotypical. there are ways around it and it is there, it is a line that if one goes over at one's peril. >> obviously it is the mark of a engage in this kind of political cartooning and the idea is to provoke. cartoons and images can become very dangerous. we think about the cartoons, caricatures of jews for example during world war ii and how that insulated hatred and violence so i wonder if you would comment on that. >> i am sorry i didn't show it. somehow it didn't find its way onto the slide show but i have in the book cartoons from bear stearns which were the worst, jews with pocono this,
8:47 am
slobbering and fat and greedy and these images were on the covers and in those days these covers would be on every street corner and they took the image of the jew for germans who were not jewish and contributed ultimately to the terrible things that happened there. interestingly, jules striker who i tell the story in the book was the only noncombatant who was condemned to death at nuremberg and was executed. i don't believe in capital punishment, but if it is the law and you have to do it they should have executed fix did the cartoons himself. i don't think you have to run everything. there are matters of taste and judgment like there are editorial matters of taste and
8:48 am
judgment. i have a strong presumption on behalf of publication despite the fact that it -- there are lines and it is important to recognize that and there are cases where you don't want to go beyond them. the danish mohammads are interesting case because if you know the whole constituency is deeply offended, you are offending their religion, they don't have the right to insist that other people obey their religion, but there comes a time when needlessly disrespecting it, you should bear the consequences for that. so it is a complicated issue. >> disagree with almost everything you said. some political correctness, a term i find offensive. someone calls me a call like i am not supposed to object. as if the left had hammer -- it is just not true. what is wrong with this cartoon
8:49 am
is in that it offends, it is that it is fundamentally false. fm nsc has nothing to do with a homosexuality. it is hack work and bad hackwork, not because i am offended but this is the work of and inapt thinker. the right to publish doesn't exempt you from the right to be criticized. the predisposition to publish, 95% of what gets written you don't publish. that you choose to publish what you think is the smartest, most perceptive, most insightful and wittiest view of the world. this is rubbish. it is just not true. i worked seven years at late night. the guy thinks. he is a bone head. it seems to me this notion of we offend people as if you are brave for manifesting hackwork and cliches.
8:50 am
>> i graduated from the nation by the time this was published but i was happy to defend not just the right to publish but the decision to publish and although i agree with your description of what it means to be gay and what it means to be funny, nevertheless, it did not think bob grossman had the right to do this and don't think he is a hack, he did something that was startling, made one look and ask what was going on but i understand what you are saying and i don't say that in a patronizing way and i respect the people who disagree with us on these lines. >> the tricky thing is if someone finds something funny it becomes in arguable, a laugh is inarguable and if something is not funny, you can try given into finding it funny. ultimately would you run or what
8:51 am
you put on the air depends on it being funny. that in itself is not enough, it has to be funny and it has to be true and this is false. it is just not true. it seems to me it has to be both. >> what i do in the book, you can say it is a cop out or not but i ran a lot of letters about it, some of which agree with you but some of which don't. >> there are two size to an argument doesn't mean they are even. >> i am not saying that. i would be interested in your comments. i am not going to burn you or everyone else with the other matters some of the ones that disagree with you. >> i know that you had at least one character done of view. what does that feel like?
8:52 am
>> i had to argue with my publisher. they told me i should have a photograph because that is what the press picks up but i pledge to have them run a caricature by david levine, but he didn't -- he might have done things that were offensive to me and jet but i have been caricatured on a number of occasions and i take it as flattery. the interesting thing is a lot of the people i would regard as the worst of the politicos, these cartoonists go after them and caricature that politicians want to buy them and hang them on their walls. i don't think that is true of ralph's dead men -- ralph steadman and he is wise and some large and in touch with ultimate truth. there is a place they don't want
8:53 am
to do that. [inaudible] >> i can't hear. >> thinking about the other side. not that they are separate entirely but the right wing extremists cartoons which i really can't think of any right now but so many controversial issues like climate change and choice and all of these issues that are so contentious and there must be great cartoonists on the other side and i am thinking so if you have these powerful cartoons coming out from right-wing extremists, who wins? the better artist? how do you answer those? >> the short answer is i don't know the answer to that question
8:54 am
but i would think the better artist has something to do with it, but the smarter and more profound thinker has something to do with it. nothing would make me more interested among my other failings, i am a boxing fan, than to see an alembics of cartoonist's against each other on both sides of the issue. knowing there are two sides to an issue doesn't mean both sides are right. good question. here we go. >> during the course of your interesting talk a mind was wandering, has the meaning of the word khartoum changed and
8:55 am
who were the first cartoonists and does the word cartoon, do they really describe what put cartoon is? >> i could not in my own research someone who was said to have done the first caricature, a caricature of the pope, have a little bit on the history of the word, i don't have faith in my own knowledge of where it came from, i think it is, the meaning of that word will change, what we call cartoonists and characters change. good questions. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> you are watching booktv on c-span2. a quick look at the prime-time
8:56 am
lineup for tonight beginning at 7:00 eastern, our court system should take revenge into account in the adjudication of criminal cases. eric schmidt and jerrod cohen of google share their vision of a world where everyone is digitally connected followed by christian carol on the weekly afterwards program. his book is strange rebels, 1979 and the birth of the twenty-first century. we conclude tonight's prime-time programming at 11:00 eastern with a panel on the career and speeches of attorney-general edward levi. for more on the television schedule. >> this department may be nearing a stage where frequency of this crime and perception that there is tolerance of it could very well undermine our ability to effectively carry out the mission and recruit and retain the good people we need. that is unacceptable to me and
8:57 am
the leaders of this institution and it should be unacceptable to everyone associated with the united states military. we need cultural change where every service members treated with dignity and respect, where all allegations of inappropriate behavior are treated with seriousness, where victims's privacy is protected, bystanders are motivated to intervene, where offenders know that they will be held accountable by strong and effective systems of justice. >> defense secretary haig allow lines new initiatives to fight sexual assault in the armed services today and 1:40 p.m. eastern, sunday morning at 10:30 senior diplomat in libya gregory hicks before the house oversight committee on the attack in benghazi. on c-span2's booktv, google's eric schmidt and jericho and share their vision of a world where everyone is digitally
8:58 am
connected sunday morning at 10:45 and on c-span3's american history tv, ray cline on cold war intelligence during the eisenhower administration sunday at 3:00. >> here's a look of the upcoming book fairs and festivals happening around country. on saturday, may 18th booktv will be live at the gaithersburg book festival in maryland, check for updates on live coverage. book expo america is the largest gathering of book sellers, retailers and industry professionals in the u.s. features 500 authors. this year happens in new york city on may 30th through june 1st. booktv will be live june 8th and ninth at the chicago tribune which fest with coverage of other panels. check our web site, for updates on our coverage. in mid july the fifteenth annual harlem book fair taking place in new york city. the festival will highlight its
8:59 am
award show, reader's choice book award and presentations from authors like john carlos and henry louis gates jr.. let us know about book fares and festivals in your area and we will lead them to our lists, post them to our wall at or e-mail us at you are watching c-span2 with politics and public affairs, weekdays featuring live coverage of the u.s. senate, on weeknights what keep public paula see events. the latest nonfiction authors and books on booktv, even the past programs and get scheduled that our web site. you can join the conversation on social media sites. >> up next, author and columnist melanie billups. the former news editor talk about terrorism, education, health care thil the winner of the orwell prize
9:00 am
of journalism has authored nine books including almost half prices, a world turned upside down and her new release guardian angel. .. >> guest: and, you know, this is just silly. life's much more complicated than that. most people are neither right, nor left, they're just ordinary folk who are getting on with leving their -- living their life in the best way they can


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on